Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
That's reasonable. Except for the fact nobody has that technology today, nor will they for many years to come.

Can you honestly think of a use-case for 5G right now that will have a real-world benefit to smartphone users?
It's of very little use to smartphone users right now, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth building for the future. I think the networks should lead the technology a little bit because they take so long to deploy. We may have 8K streaming by the time 5G is fully deployed.

That said, I don't think smartphone users are the only potential consumers here. It might be useful for working on a laptop in a public place for certain kinds of work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ener Ji
It's of very little use to smartphone users right now, but that doesn't mean it isn't worth building for the future. I think the networks should lead the technology a little bit because they take so long to deploy. We may have 8K streaming by the time 5G is fully deployed.

That said, I don't think smartphone users are the only potential consumers here. It might be useful for working on a laptop in a public place for certain kinds of work.

That makes sense for the carriers building out the infrastructure. There are specific industries where 5G will have a significant impact, so they will want to make sure it’s widely available.

However, what people are trying to claim (incorrectly) is that if the iPhone doesn’t have 5G then it’s at a huge disadvantage compared to phones that do have 5G. That simply isn’t true.
 
Still on iPhone we will have ridiculous cellular download size limit for apps on 5G. Cellular data is expensive is US, but in many countries it’s dart cheap. Why not increase the limit?
 
I honestly still don't know why is it so necessary 5G, when 4G+ is already giving us 300Mbps speeds...

Maybe on highly populated areas it will manage better lots of connections... That's the only benefit I can see. I'm happy with my 4G connection anyway.


It's called progress. Back in the day, people thought 1.4MB floppy disk was enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ener Ji
I see. So without facts to back your claim you resort to the usual "Apple fans are blind to anything other than Apple".

Do I really need to provide any facts to prove that faster speed is better? Is not it obvious? For once it helps save the battery, it improves user experience (where low latency matters), it gives you real bandwidth in the cities (especially in crowded spaces which includes the arenas but is not limited to them - real speeds drop very often with 4G and 5G might help).
 
Here is my “5g” experience with AT&T.

A whopping .22 Megabits per second download. I hope this makes everyone feel jealous!!!

Yes I know it is 5G”e” however I would have thought it was supposed to be at least the same performance as 4G LTE. In the part of town where I work the throughput dropped when they turned on 5G”e”.
 

Attachments

  • B9D9E9F5-9EB0-41C2-BABA-F624E31A1160.jpeg
    B9D9E9F5-9EB0-41C2-BABA-F624E31A1160.jpeg
    112 KB · Views: 97
Meaningless. Network/download speeds aren't the limiting factor in how our devices work/perform. LTE is already very fast and has much better coverage than 5G will (for several years).

This is just another feature that will be overhypoed as necessary when it will make practically no difference to the consumer.

This is simply the next stage. It's not going to come into effect tomorrow, infrastructure deployment and update takes a long time to perform. Technology, including speed is moving forward, which is why 5G is coming. It's a natural progression. As we continue to rely on more data being transferred we will continue to improve the technology to do so.
 
Do I really need to provide any facts to prove that faster speed is better? Is not it obvious? For once it helps save the battery, it improves user experience (where low latency matters), it gives you real bandwidth in the cities (especially in crowded spaces which includes the arenas but is not limited to them - real speeds drop very often with 4G and 5G might help).

Apparently you haven't been reading the extensive tests done on the current 5G devices.

Battery life on 5G is actually significantly worse than on 4G with current devices. It has the potential to get better, but that won't happen for a couple years until 5G is widespread and we're on the 2nd and 3rd generation modems. Which is when Apple will have 5G in their devices - when it makes sense and the technology is mature.

Speaking of modems, are you aware of the significant shortcomings of the Qualcomm X50 modem? I feel sorry for anyone who wasted money on a device with THAT modem and thought they were going to be on the bleeding edge of 5G. More expensive to implement, doesn't support all 5G networks, uses more power and since it's 5G only you have to add a SECOND modem to your device for support of older networks (like 3G or 4G).

Latency is irrelevant. 5G latency is great for real-time applications (industrial use, transportation and so on) but has little benefit to smartphones where LTE latency is already very low. Especially considering our devices still have to deal with the latency in the ENTIRE network (not just your "last mile of the pipe" from the tower to your phone) but that of the rest of the network and the servers providing you with whatever data you're requesting. I find it amazing people think having a really fast connection to your device somehow makes EVERYTHING faster. In reality it never works like that (something I experienced when I had both 100Mbps and 1Gbps in my house and was able to compare both networks side-by-side).
 
This is simply the next stage. It's not going to come into effect tomorrow, infrastructure deployment and update takes a long time to perform. Technology, including speed is moving forward, which is why 5G is coming. It's a natural progression. As we continue to rely on more data being transferred we will continue to improve the technology to do so.

I believe the Millimeter wave technology(part of what they call 5G) is going to hurt smaller towns/communities. The carriers are already resistant to putting up(or upgrading) Cell towers in lower density/populated areas due to the cost/return on investment. Now we are talking about having to put transmitters on every 3rd or 4th light/power pole to get proper coverage. Sure that makes sense in highly populated areas but in smaller towns they are going to have to invest a LOT of money with little to no return on that investment.
 
Last edited:
5G, two levels of service being a 5G iPhone but also a stationary residential modem box.

No way am I planning on buying the very first 5G iPhone.
 
Electrical engineer here. You are just wrong. Outright, utterly wrong. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. You are confusing the part of the spectrum that has frequencies in ultraviolet and above, which is cancer causing, with the frequency spectrums used in communications, which are all far below visible light, let alone ultraviolet. Ultraviolet is the invisible, and highest frequency part of sunlight, and can give you skin cancer. Higher frequencies than that include x-rays, gamma rays (from nuclear reactions), and cosmic rays (which are almost entirely blocked by the earth's atmosphere), all of which can also give you cancer. Visible light, and all the communications spectrum, are all of lower frequencies than ultraviolet, and can't give you cancer. That said, the spectrum below ultraviolet can cook you, but it has to be insanely higher energy levels than what is used in telecommunications (eg using a magnifying glass to magnify sunlight, or sticking your head inside a microwave oven (note: microwave ovens are definitely high enough power to cook you, but they are surrounded by a faraday cage - that metal grill covering the door, and the metal cage around the back and sides - which in the case of microwave frequency, the microwaves can't pass through a metal shield with holes smaller than 12cm diameter (the wavelength of typical microwaves in an oven)), or standing right next to the amplifier inside the generation room under a TV tower when it is turned on (it has to be turned off for anyone to do any maintenance work on it, and is locked out when it is turned on. The energy levels decrease by the inverse square law, so the energy levels quickly become very small by distance, and are completely safe after a certain distance)). Every single iteration of mobile phones has come with people worried about cancer, but it is all rubbish, and as you see around you, people aren't getting cancer from 1G, 2G, 3G, or 4G, and they won't from 5G either, or any other G after that.
Sometimes I just have to stand up and applaud.
 
Apparently you haven't been reading the extensive tests done on the current 5G devices.

Battery life on 5G is actually significantly worse than on 4G with current devices. It has the potential to get better, but that won't happen for a couple years until 5G is widespread and we're on the 2nd and 3rd generation modems. Which is when Apple will have 5G in their devices - when it makes sense and the technology is mature.

Speaking of modems, are you aware of the significant shortcomings of the Qualcomm X50 modem? I feel sorry for anyone who wasted money on a device with THAT modem and thought they were going to be on the bleeding edge of 5G. More expensive to implement, doesn't support all 5G networks, uses more power and since it's 5G only you have to add a SECOND modem to your device for support of older networks (like 3G or 4G).

Latency is irrelevant. 5G latency is great for real-time applications (industrial use, transportation and so on) but has little benefit to smartphones where LTE latency is already very low. Especially considering our devices still have to deal with the latency in the ENTIRE network (not just your "last mile of the pipe" from the tower to your phone) but that of the rest of the network and the servers providing you with whatever data you're requesting. I find it amazing people think having a really fast connection to your device somehow makes EVERYTHING faster. In reality it never works like that (something I experienced when I had both 100Mbps and 1Gbps in my house and was able to compare both networks side-by-side).
"Which is when Apple will have 5G in their devices - when it makes sense and the technology is mature". Are you aware that Apple could not have a 5G phone this year even if they wanted to because of the fight with Qualcomm? Their entrance in 5G was delayed to 2020 because of that and not because they were waiting for the right moment.While 5G may need more power on millimeter wave frequencies, 5G is not limited to this wave lengths. It can operate on the same frequencies as LTE. The tests I saw happened to be done on millimeter wave frequencies. Also, test methodology is important. While 5G may use more power when communicating, it also needs less time to stay active to pull the same amount of data because of the higher bandwidth.

Latency is very important for gaming not just industrial applications.

Yes X50 is not perfect. But X55 has been announced a while back and the phones with it are expected to be released by the end of 2019. Besides, Qualcomm is not the only company producing 5G modems (although their modems are the only ones available to Apple). Samsung and Huawei have 5G modems too.
 
What health and safety risks? That’s the question. Aside from dodgy claims that radio waves in cell phones and routers can cause cancer have we seen ANY proof? Studies?
Are you familiar with the microwave technology? If it can cook food, then it also does this to our brains/bodies already.
What health and safety risks? That’s the question. Aside from dodgy claims that radio waves in cell phones and routers can cause cancer have we seen ANY proof? Studies?

yes, there have been a few major studies, in fact. Let me google them for you:
https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-cellphone-5g-health-20160808-snap-story.html

https://ehtrust.org/key-issues/cell...s-iot-scientific-overview-human-health-risks/

https://mdsafetech.org/problems/5g/

https://thefreethoughtproject.com/school-removes-cell-tower-cancer/

Also, if you don’t know how to find credible research online, why would you be concerned with the speed at which you watch your porn anyway?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CanyonLizard
These "G" iterations are just to maintain sales. Why not go straight to 100G ?
[doublepost=1564234278][/doublepost]
Are you familiar with the microwave technology? If it can cook food, then it also does this to our brains/bodies already.


yes, there have been a few major studies, in fact. Let me google them for you:
https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-cellphone-5g-health-20160808-snap-story.html

https://ehtrust.org/key-issues/cell...s-iot-scientific-overview-human-health-risks/

https://mdsafetech.org/problems/5g/

https://thefreethoughtproject.com/school-removes-cell-tower-cancer/

Also, if you don’t know how to find credible research online, why would you be concerned with the speed at which you watch your porn anyway?

Porn has never been so good. Where would we be without Malena, Ginger, Sophia, Sinn and all the other good gals. And the faster we get it the better.
 
if 5G becomes or is available at your house, you will want it... A LOT.
 
My question is will we be able to share our 5G service both on our cell phones and in our houses without having to pay for two separate services?
 
  • Like
Reactions: jeyf
So you flew to Chicago just to demonstrate the peak download speed? The interesting questions with 5G aren’t the peak speeds, but questions about range and penetration... How did it work around the corner, how did it work inside, what what the coverage radius, how did it work in your pocket, how did it work at transit speeds?
 
  • Like
Reactions: drumcat and Ener Ji
5g, as it is with its necessary deployment of "towers" so close together, will only ever be an urban core convenience. The tech will never scale if receiver range is so poor.

It's five-gee, in your 1 km radius of your tall city buildings! Yay!
 
So you flew to Chicago just to demonstrate the peak download speed? The interesting questions with 5G aren’t the peak speeds, but questions about range and penetration... How did it work around the corner, how did it work inside, what what the coverage radius, how did it work in your pocket, how did it work at transit speeds?
As already stated, 5G is available in a limited number of locations, and the results were inconsistent. There's not enough coverage to warrant conclusive testing of coverage range and penetration, transit speeds, inside/outside, etc. Give it time. I'm not even thinking about 5G devices or coverage for at least a year, maybe two or more.
 
As already stated, 5G is available in a limited number of locations, and the results were inconsistent. There's not enough coverage to warrant conclusive testing of coverage range and penetration, transit speeds, inside/outside, etc. Give it time. I'm not even thinking about 5G devices or coverage for at least a year, maybe two or more.
So MR got a free vacation to Chicago to hold an Android phone in the air and read off a number we already know claiming this is what a 2020 iPhone will be like, without a detailed look into the challenges? Someone at Verizon marketing deserves a promotion....
 
5G availability:
the digital divide comes again to N American suburbs near you
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.